new windmill design

[skiprob]

I am new to this Forum. I do not know the rules so therefore I apologize in advance if what I'm posting is inappropriate. However, I'm glad I found your site because what I'm about to post is "extremely" important and am doing so because it appears to be a very enlightened group.

 

I "believe" that I have recently invented a windmill that is substantially more efficient than anything ever produced that can operate in wind zones as low as Zone 2s. I have built a small working prototype, filed the provisional patent, incorporated, started working with attorneys on business plan design and private placement memorandum. The catch 22 is, to provide a substantive business plan, requires efficiency/cost numbers that have not yet been determined.

 

I'm not just a talking about a percentage better, I believe it will test out to be multiple times more efficient.

 

With all that said: Engineering needs to be done. We're bing quoted US $30,000K to $75,000K just for Phase 1 - Modeling, analysis and getting to construction of full size prototype. If it is as efficient as I believe, We should probably have two engineering firms run the modeling to obtain efficiency numbers. We have just initiated contact with three engineering firms. Their assignment is to determine what sized "Robinson Windmill" would be required to produce 15 kW and to determine estimated costs of same. Guest what my last name is?

 

International Patents are estimated at $150K to $200K, Prototype at $20,000 to $30,000. A war chest for potential litigation is estimated at $500,000.

 

So in conclusion we need investor(s) that can drop $1,000,000 US with the potential of losing it. Can we take a start up to profitability? Sure you can but, as anybody whom has tried will tell you, it won't be easy and it's very high risk.

 

Skip

[malco]

Skiprob,

 

You'd be better to build your own prototype and test the efficiency directly rather than paying arms and legs to get it done by modelling. I doubt that any fluid dynamics programme can accurately predict the efficiency of a radical new design anyway, these codes tend to be used only after a long period of tweaking to get the "fiddle factors" sorted out. They have quite limited power, due to the basically intransigent nature of the problem of modelling fluid flow - a bit like trying to model human societies.

 

I doubt you'll get any interest at all until you've got something that actually does the business. You have to bear in mind that investors have "heard it all before" when it comes to world-shaking inventions. They have to be a bit like literary agents - they know that the best sellers are out there, but they also know for every bestseller there are 100,000 or more dud scripts, plus all those people who are convinced they can write a blockbuster and they just haven't got around to doing it.....

 

I've been involved in computational fluid dynamics, and venture capital, and I have been involved in novel writing, so I know what I am talking about on this one.

 

Wind turbines by nature are lo-tech, so I can't see a problem in putting say £20K into a working prototype. I doubt it would be that much. I could easily build a practical glider for £5K, for instance.

[drbubb]

ISo in conclusion we need investor(s) that can drop $1,000,000 US with the potential of losing it. Can we take a start up to profitability? Sure you can but, as anybody whom has tried will tell you, it won't be easy and it's very high risk.

 

Skip

 

SURE. No problem Where should I send the check?

 

= =

 

Actually, the way to do this is:

To raise a much smaller sum of money from people who know and trust you to:

 

+ Approach people with some expertise who can validate your idea

+ Demonstrate that some important aspect of your invention really works

+ Get advice from various people who know how to raise money (and whom you can meet face-to-face)

 

Once you have done the above, then you will need to start writing a proper business plan,

addressed to the potential investors (or types of investors) you should have pre-identified

 

No one writes big cheques for people they have never met, for untested ideas

[skiprob]

Thanks DrBubb,

We're doing all those things with as much time as we have to put into it. Without the engineering we just don't know how well it's going to work. It's so differrent that I think it's going to be difficult to get anybody to take an educated guess without doing a full analysis of it's potential efficiency.

 

At this point we need the engineering. The engineers can be paid directly. The rest should be relatively easy if the numbers come in anywhere near what I expect.

 

It's a pretty risky venture. What's a patent worth and how much to defend it?

 

It's actually pretty simple physics but taking a stab at it's efficiency takes alot more specific knowledge than I have.

 

Like I said it's a Catch 22 and I don't want anyone to risk a nickle that they can't afford to lose.

 

P.S. You can send the check to my bank account: Enless Energy Solutions, Inc. @ Fantasy Island Bank.

 

Thanks again for taking the time to reply

 

Skip

 

 

SURE. No problem Where should I send the check?

 

= =

 

Actually, the way to do this is:

To raise a much smaller sum of money from people who know and trust you to:

 

+ Approach people with some expertise who can validate your idea

+ Demonstrate that some important aspect of your invention really works

+ Get advice from various people who know how to raise money (and whom you can meet face-to-face)

 

Once you have done the above, then you will need to start writing a proper business plan,

addressed to the potential investors (or types of investors) you should have pre-identified

 

No one writes big cheques for people they have never met, for untested ideas

[drbubb]

At this point we need the engineering. The engineers can be paid directly. The rest should be relatively easy if the numbers come in anywhere near what I expect.

 

It's a pretty risky venture. What's a patent worth and how much to defend it?

 

Skip,

Maybe you can get the engineers to work for a stake in the business

[skiprob]

Skip,

Maybe you can get the engineers to work for a stake in the business

 

Hey Dr.

I'm open to this and all options. You would think that if the design is a efficient as I beleive, than an engineering firm would take the risk.

 

And if I can get an engineering firm to take the risk, that would provide a "high" level of evidence as to it's superior efficiency.

 

Thanks again,

[skiprob]

Hey Malco,

 

Thanks for posting.

 

My original thought was to build a full size prototype. Various people, believing that the modeling is vailable, suggested doing computer modeling. I've had my concerns about the available software, that you've really reinforced. Your right, we've gotten no serious consideration at this point, however few with real money have seen this thing. Almost all that have seen this windmill think it to have a real possibility. Part of the problem may be getting to the right individual(s). An individual with "decent" physics and mechanical aptitude can easily see the potential.

 

Your are correct, I can build this thing very inexpensively. My time is the problem but it is not something that can't be overcome. One of my best friends is a very good fabricator raring to start. He's has tons of experience with aluminum which is perfect. The aluminum supplier even said he would give me a break in cost due to being an invention.

 

How confident are you that the modeling will not provide me with the level of accuracy needed to determine true efficiency numbers?

 

Skiprob,

 

You'd be better to build your own prototype and test the efficiency directly rather than paying arms and legs to get it done by modelling. I doubt that any fluid dynamics programme can accurately predict the efficiency of a radical new design anyway, these codes tend to be used only after a long period of tweaking to get the "fiddle factors" sorted out. They have quite limited power, due to the basically intransigent nature of the problem of modelling fluid flow - a bit like trying to model human societies.

 

I doubt you'll get any interest at all until you've got something that actually does the business. You have to bear in mind that investors have "heard it all before" when it comes to world-shaking inventions. They have to be a bit like literary agents - they know that the best sellers are out there, but they also know for every bestseller there are 100,000 or more dud scripts, plus all those people who are convinced they can write a blockbuster and they just haven't got around to doing it.....

 

I've been involved in computational fluid dynamics, and venture capital, and I have been involved in novel writing, so I know what I am talking about on this one.

 

Wind turbines by nature are lo-tech, so I can't see a problem in putting say £20K into a working prototype. I doubt it would be that much. I could easily build a practical glider for £5K, for instance.

[malco]

You write:

 

"How confident are you that the modeling will not provide me with the level of accuracy needed to determine true efficiency numbers?"

 

You will have to judge how close it is to something well studied. If it is quite like any existing aerodynamic machine then you are in with a chance if you can get in with people who have proprietory experience. You indicated that this was something pretty radical, which is why I doubt that computational means will get you very far. It MIGHT be that the prediction turns out to be accurate, but people risking their money want something more than a printout from a Dawes Code, if you know what I mean.

 

You say you can build a demonstrator fairly cheaply. If I had a great idea I couldn't wait to see it made , even if only as a model.

 

I must say that I am sceptical you have come up with anything that is really all that new. Aerodynamic machines are mature and they all face the same problems whether it is a propeller or a radial turbine.

 

How confident are you that you have produced something fundamentally new?

 

I'll be blunt and say that I don't think you have UNLESS you have solved, or alleviated, the issue of intermittency, which is of course one basic weakness of wind turbines.

 

When you eventually issue a press release detailing your invention and it turns out that my doubts are wrong, I promise you I will eat humble pie.

[drbubb]

The "new" aspect....

Would a picture give it away, or words?

If words, then why not post a picture here of some aspect that does not give away the guts of your idea

[The Speculator]

The "new" aspect....

Would a picture give it away, or words?

If words, then why not post a picture here of some aspect that does not give away the guts of your idea

 

Interesting thread, I agree, a photo or basic description would be helpful

 

have run a check through patent offices for a wind turbine has been registered under the name Robinson, skip or a variation of; nothing. Checked US, Canada, UK, Europe and Australia

 

Which jurisdiction are you from, Nigeria?

 

But seriously, if you have a working model, provide something more, raising a million for a venture in the green energy sector isn't going to be hard, the average government, (assuming you are not from Nigeria) normally has a funding option where they will provide a portion of what is required should it look viable and the company is well run

[spline]

From what I understand about windmills, there is a ‘theoretical’ aerodynamic efficiency at the Betz limit, say around 59% of the kinetic energy passing through the disk, and then you lose a bit more from skin drag and induced drag caused by the wake/tip vortices – this takes you down to maybe 45-50% (very rough guess), so the possible aerodynamic improvements are not really huge, more about tweaking the aerodynamic sections, boundary layer control, and optimising the lift distribution, etc.

 

So at a first take, I’d say that claims of doubling or tripling the efficiency look rather fanciful - you’ll need to explain what the particular problem was that you have ‘solved’.

[Macaque]

I am new to this Forum. I do not know the rules so therefore I apologize in advance if what I'm posting is inappropriate. However, I'm glad I found your site because what I'm about to post is "extremely" important and am doing so because it appears to be a very enlightened group.

 

I "believe" that I have recently invented a windmill that is substantially more efficient than anything ever produced that can operate in wind zones as low as Zone 2s. I have built a small working prototype, filed the provisional patent, incorporated, started working with attorneys on business plan design and private placement memorandum. The catch 22 is, to provide a substantive business plan, requires efficiency/cost numbers that have not yet been determined.

 

I'm not just a talking about a percentage better, I believe it will test out to be multiple times more efficient.

 

With all that said: Engineering needs to be done. We're bing quoted US $30,000K to $75,000K just for Phase 1 - Modeling, analysis and getting to construction of full size prototype. If it is as efficient as I believe, We should probably have two engineering firms run the modeling to obtain efficiency numbers. We have just initiated contact with three engineering firms. Their assignment is to determine what sized "Robinson Windmill" would be required to produce 15 kW and to determine estimated costs of same. Guest what my last name is?

 

International Patents are estimated at $150K to $200K, Prototype at $20,000 to $30,000. A war chest for potential litigation is estimated at $500,000.

 

So in conclusion we need investor(s) that can drop $1,000,000 US with the potential of losing it. Can we take a start up to profitability? Sure you can but, as anybody whom has tried will tell you, it won't be easy and it's very high risk.

 

Skip

You are new to this game.

 

You are talking about improving the conversion efficiency of a machine that utilises free energy. This is not exactly as compelling as a more efficient petrol engine.

 

The patent costs to which you refer relate to cumulative costs of a fairly mature patent. Why would anyone want invest so far ahead against untested IP?

 

You have a working prototype. That is the best model you could have. It won't cost much to fit a few instruments and compare the performance data with conventional windmills. Many Universities are happy to do projects for the free loan of equipment and a modest contribution. Third party reports carry much more credibility.

 

You want a war chest for defending your IP. That does not say much for your confidence in the I.P.

 

You have the skeleton of a business plan for $1m. Of that, $700 relates to costs very little of which would be incurred in the first 3 years. $30 - 75K are being spent on projects which are not good value for money. You have ignored the bread and butter costs of running a business.

 

When you go to investors, you have to have something to show them. You need evidence that the technology works and it has commercial value. You need to show that the IP looks good (favourable search reports and evidence of novelty/inventive step) and you are not beholden to any prior art. You also need to convince the investors that your seedling company has competant management. Even with all of this, you would be very lucky to raise $1m.

[skiprob]

You are new to this game.

 

You are talking about improving the conversion efficiency of a machine that utilises free energy. This is not exactly as compelling as a more efficient petrol engine.

 

The patent costs to which you refer relate to cumulative costs of a fairly mature patent. Why would anyone want invest so far ahead against untested IP?

 

You have a working prototype. That is the best model you could have. It won't cost much to fit a few instruments and compare the performance data with conventional windmills. Many Universities are happy to do projects for the free loan of equipment and a modest contribution. Third party reports carry much more credibility.

 

You want a war chest for defending your IP. That does not say much for your confidence in the I.P.

 

You have the skeleton of a business plan for $1m. Of that, $700 relates to costs very little of which would be incurred in the first 3 years. $30 - 75K are being spent on projects which are not good value for money. You have ignored the bread and butter costs of running a business.

 

When you go to investors, you have to have something to show them. You need evidence that the technology works and it has commercial value. You need to show that the IP looks good (favourable search reports and evidence of novelty/inventive step) and you are not beholden to any prior art. You also need to convince the investors that your seedling company has competant management. Even with all of this, you would be very lucky to raise $1m.

[skiprob]

Thanks for all the great comments,

 

And you are all right. Without imperical evidence and verifiable effeciency numbers I only have a pipe dream.

 

However, I have some good news. I'm being given the opportunity to place a prototype of my invention in the gulfstream here off the coast of Florida. From what I understand the only other system being tested is a topedo looking turbine with the blades in the rear (can't remember what that's called), but it looks like it will be a good system to test mine against. I plan on starting the construction is just a few days.

 

I'm having to tether to a floating platform in addition to just attempting to harness the gulstreams 3 to 4 knot power, so I have some concerns about handling the rough seas. The get 20' +/- on accasion.

 

Since my system is omnidirectional I think I have it solved.

 

I'll keep everyone informed. Wish me luck.

 

P.S. From what I understand, the US Patent Office doesn't publish "provisional" patent details.

[skiprob]

Anybody know anything about Steve Taber and Nordic Windpower? They're in Europe and California and he's the Chairman. He appears to have a number of other ventures with various principles of Nordic.

[skiprob]

Anybody know anything about Steve Taber and Nordic Windpower? They're in Europe and California and he's the Chairman. He appears to have a number of other ventures with various principles of Nordic.

[spline]

Skibob, The starting point and general framework for any discussion of a wind turbine is usually the Betz limit, then how far below that the current state of the art is sitting, and finally what clever things can be done to close the gap.

 

Now, as far as I’m aware, the ‘gap’ is somewhere around (very rough guess) 10% and the commercial WT companies are competing to close it with improvements to aerofoil section design, skin drag and boundary layer / separation control, and generally lots of other small tweaks. There is some additional scope if one considers the non-uniform wind profile seen by large WTs, and the additional energy available in the approach flow turbulence.

 

But all this implies that the scope for a ‘multiple times’ improvement is probably not there, so the first thing you need to do is apply some sort of ‘sanity check’ to your claims before you commit to spending large amounts of money on engineering and business plans – either by making a small model and getting some performance data, or by posting a picture or the general principle of the thing (the provisional patent you already have should protect the idea) for feedback.

 

You will get the same response whoever you talk to, so you might as well start here.

[skiprob]

Enless Energy Solutions has completed the turbine of a 4' rotational diameter verticle axis waterturbine prototype that we have been told will be tested by the Sea Tech division of Florida Atlantic University in the comming months. We are projecting an output of 300+ lbs of force at 38 rpm in a 5 knot current. The cost of materials and labor was less than $1800 with myself doing a portion of the labor for $0. FAU is providing the infrastructure, for those companies who wish to test systems. They are placing an anchor in the bottom of the gulfstream in the Florida Strait about 15 miles off shore of Dania, Florida where the Sea Tech Campus is located. The installation of their platform was pushed back to February 2008 from November due to permitting and jurisdictional issues, A/K/A gov red tape.

 

We are still researching methods of testing and the equipment necessary to best test preformance. Although we have been verbally invited to place our system on their platform we only have emails and no formal invitation, so we are relying on their integrity for the test. Their push is to get their system in place, test a standard tubine with the blade form Verdant Power, also in the works and raise additional capital to continue the Ocean Energy Program. I'm still under a provisional patent so I've requested the head of the department to no disclose my turbine design. So far so good.

 

They're are however other testing methods that actually may be less expensive, however we would like the results to come from a university or other authoritative entity.

 

We continue to seek an angel investor or seed capital.

 

If there is anyone who can lead us to the right individual or group, we are getting to the point where time is becoming an issue due to the patents.

 

Skip

[skiprob]

Just a little update on the Robinson wind and water turbine prototype testing. Finally had a good test on the third attempt. First two attempts saw the need for the mounting system to be strengthened and reinforced to take advantage of it's full potential. However, we beleive that we are still not fully capturing all the torque. The boat is not heavy and large enough to withstand the lateral force. The front of the boat moves about 6" from side to side as the water turbine goes through it's rotaton.

 

FYI: We have not attempted to test with FAU on their platform, as the mooring and infrastructure has still not been installed in the Gulfstream and the potential protection of our IP is in question when dealing with State and Federal Grants through the University system in the U.S.

 

We used a a 0-1000 pd load cell to measure the power. A third party engineer has run the number based on our tests. Please understand that the rpm and water speeds were done manually so the acuracy of this test is much less than desired. Final U.S. and international patents are being finalized.

 

The water turbine consists of a three panel system verticle axis design of 1.5' wide x 2.5' high for each panel with a 4' rotational diameter.

 

Maximine horse power obtained was between .428 to .436 with between 1250 and 1500 in-lbs of torque. Tests were done between 3 and 5 mph using a hand held GPS.

 

This simple design we beleive is going to be very cost effective compared to other wind and water turbine designs.

 

Our next test will be a full digital test of all three aspects; load, rpm and water speed so it should give us some really good numbers for the lower potential output range. The boat as mentioned before is just two small. We we probably go to a stationary rig after that.

 

We are quite please with its proformance, understanding the lack of engineering for the prototype design. One step at a time. I'll have about $15,000 and more time than I even guess at, after the final 1/2 of the patent is paid.

 

We have a nice monetary commitment that will keep the ship floating for for a while so wish me continued luck.

 

Skip

[wednesday2]

I wish you lots of luck...sounds very exciting.

 

I wanted to mention something I saw on tv the other day....Bill Moyers I believe. He was interviewing Barbara Boxer, US Senator who's working on some global warming initiatives, which apparently are being met with much resistance, even from some fellow democrats. The thing that really caught my ear - she was saying how venture capitalists are sitting on the sidelines right now, watching to see what happens in congress. She said they are wanting to invest billions in alternative energies, more than they gave to the high-techs and dot coms this past decade. But they are waiting for congress to act first.

 

Go Barbara Go!

 

 

Just a little update on the Robinson wind and water turbine prototype testing. Finally had a good test on the third attempt. First two attempts saw the need for the mounting system to be strengthened and reinforced to take advantage of it's full potential. However, we beleive that we are still not fully capturing all the torque. The boat is not heavy and large enough to withstand the lateral force. The front of the boat moves about 6" from side to side as the water turbine goes through it's rotaton.

 

FYI: We have not attempted to test with FAU on their platform, as the mooring and infrastructure has still not been installed in the Gulfstream and the potential protection of our IP is in question when dealing with State and Federal Grants through the University system in the U.S.

 

We used a a 0-1000 pd load cell to measure the power. A third party engineer has run the number based on our tests. Please understand that the rpm and water speeds were done manually so the acuracy of this test is much less than desired. Final U.S. and international patents are being finalized.

 

The water turbine consists of a three panel system verticle axis design of 1.5' wide x 2.5' high for each panel with a 4' rotational diameter.

 

Maximine horse power obtained was between .428 to .436 with between 1250 and 1500 in-lbs of torque. Tests were done between 3 and 5 mph using a hand held GPS.

 

This simple design we beleive is going to be very cost effective compared to other wind and water turbine designs.

 

Our next test will be a full digital test of all three aspects; load, rpm and water speed so it should give us some really good numbers for the lower potential output range. The boat as mentioned before is just two small. We we probably go to a stationary rig after that.

 

We are quite please with its proformance, understanding the lack of engineering for the prototype design. One step at a time. I'll have about $15,000 and more time than I even guess at, after the final 1/2 of the patent is paid.

 

We have a nice monetary commitment that will keep the ship floating for for a while so wish me continued luck.

 

Skip

 

[skiprob]

Update 04/23/09

Pleased to announce I finally JV'd with a small Engineering firm in Jupiter Florida. After a year of due-diligence the engineers headed by PhD in Fluids and 4 others with various turbine experience wanted a piece of the action. Understand that I've never paid them a dime but gave up 75% of the water turbine IP rights only under the JV agreement but maintained some control by requiring an 80% plurality vote to expedite any activities.

 

After some prototype testing, modeling and substantive enhancements, they are telling me that they believe based on what they think is sufficient modeling to prove the design, that we can produce electricity at an installed price, including long term maintenance, both failure and scheduled, at $0.0303 per kWh. Obviously we are starting to attract attention even though this claim is very hard to beleive and we are keeping the technlogy under wraps. We are not quite ready to go public yet as additional IP is needed and we should shore up a few conservative cost assumptions made during their analysis over the last few months.

 

I understand the conceptual engineering enhancements that they have made to my design so I am really excited about the potential of this system. I keep having thoughts of a fatal flaw surfacing, but none yet. Our business plan is in the final stages and everything appears to be coming together, taking a bit longer then we had anticipated, but never the less still forging ahead along the very treacherous path to success.

 

Skip